Ecosystem Services Baseline and Impact Assessment Dundee ... · ECOSYSTEM SERVICES BASELINE AND...

Ecosystem Services Baseline and Impact Assessment

Dundee Precious Metals Ada Tepe Deposit

Krumovgrad Project, Bulgaria

Submitted to

Dundee Precious Metals Krumovgrad EAD

Submitted by

AMEC Earth & Environmental (UK) Ltd.

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES BASELINE AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT

SUPPLEMENTARY LENDER’S INFORMATION PACKAGE (SLIP)

DUNDEE PRECIOUS METALS - ADA TEPE DEPOSIT

KRUMOVGRAD PROJECT- BULGARIA

NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Report Issue Form

R E P O R T S U B M I S S I O N F O R M

Client Name Dundee Precious Metals Krumovgrad EAD

Project Name Krumovgrad Gold Mining Project, Bulgaria

Report Title Ecosystem Services Baseline and Impact Assessment

Project Reference 7879140150 Date November 2014

Document Status Final Issue No. 2

Document Reference A150-14-R2258

Author Philip Rogers

13/11/2014

Reviewer Fergus Anckorn

14/11/2014

Project Manager Miguel Diaz

26/11/2014

D I S C L A I M E R

This report was prepared exclusively for the client above by AMEC Earth & Environmental UK Ltd. (AMEC). The quality of information, conclusions and estimates contained herein are consistent with the level of effort involved in AMEC’s services and based on: i) information available at the time of preparation, ii) data supplied by outside sources and iii) the assumptions, conditions and qualifications set forth in this report. This report is intended for use by the above client subject to the terms and conditions of its contract with AMEC. Any other use of, or reliance on, this report by any third party is at that party’s sole risk.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Contents i

C O N T E N T S

1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1-1

2.0 APPROACH ...................................................................................................................... 2-3 2.1 Overview .............................................................................................................. 2-3 2.2 Defining the Study Area ....................................................................................... 2-3 2.3 Defining the Ecosystem Services ........................................................................ 2-6

2.3.1 Provisional Services ............................................................................... 2-6 2.3.2 Cultural Services .................................................................................... 2-6 2.3.3 Regulating Services ................................................................................ 2-6 2.3.4 Supporting Services ............................................................................... 2-6

2.4 Preliminary Screening ......................................................................................... 2-7 2.5 Baseline methodology ....................................................................................... 2-10

2.5.1 Ecosystem Service Importance and Replaceability ............................. 2-10 2.5.2 Ecosystem Services Prioritisation ........................................................ 2-11 2.5.3 Impact Assessment Approach and Methods ........................................ 2-12

3.0 BASELINE CHARACTERISATION AND ANALYSIS ..................................................... 3-14 3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 3-14 3.2 Ecosystem Services Prioritisation ..................................................................... 3-20 3.3 Mine Dependencies on Ecosystem Services .................................................... 3-20

3.3.1 Mine Ecosystem Services Prioritisation ............................................... 3-21

4.0 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS ................................................................... 4-22 4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 4-22 4.2 Potential Impacts on Provisional Services ........................................................ 4-22

4.2.1 Mushroom/Fungi collection................................................................... 4-22 4.2.2 Collection of herbs ................................................................................ 4-24 4.2.3 Fishing .................................................................................................. 4-24 4.2.4 Hunting ................................................................................................. 4-24 4.2.5 Crop cultivation ..................................................................................... 4-24 4.2.6 Livestock ............................................................................................... 4-25 4.2.7 Drinking water ....................................................................................... 4-25

4.3 Potential Impacts on Cultural Services .............................................................. 4-26 4.3.1 Spiritual, religious and aesthetic values ............................................... 4-26 4.3.2 Cultural traditional practices ................................................................. 4-27

4.4 Potential Impacts on Regulating Services ......................................................... 4-27 4.4.1 Erosion regulation ................................................................................. 4-27

4.5 Potential Impacts on Supporting Services ......................................................... 4-27 4.5.1 Potential impacts on soil formation processes ..................................... 4-27 4.5.2 Potential impacts on water cycle .......................................................... 4-28

5.0 MITIGATION MEASURES AND RESIDUAL IMPACTS................................................. 5-29 5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 5-29 5.2 Drinking water supply ........................................................................................ 5-29 5.3 Erosion control, Nutrient cycling and soil formation processes ......................... 5-29 5.4 Water cycling ..................................................................................................... 5-30

6.0 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................ 6-32

7.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 7-33





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Contents ii

T A B L E S

Table 2-1: Preliminary Screening Assessment ................................................................................ 2-9 Table 2-2: Assessing the value of Ecosystem Services ................................................................ 2-11 Table 2-3: Evaluating Significance of Impacts on Ecosystem Services ........................................ 2-13 Table 3-1: Provisioning Services in the Mine Area of Influence .................................................... 3-15 Table 3-2: Cultural Services in the Mine Area of Influence ............................................................ 3-18 Table 3-3: Regulating Services in the Mine Area of Influence ....................................................... 3-18 Table 3-4: Supporting Services in the Mine Area of Influence....................................................... 3-19 Table 3-5: Ecosystem Services Prioritisation................................................................................. 3-20 Table 3-6: Ecosystem services dependencies of mine project ...................................................... 3-21 Table 3-7: Ecosystem Prioritisation Table – Mine site ................................................................... 3-21 Table 5-1: Ecosystem Prioritisation and final rating values after mitigation and residual impacts. 5-31

F I G U R E S

Figure 2-1: A map showing the study area for Ecosystem Services in the Krumovgrad Project Area.

The buffer zone is based upon the settlements where the socio-economic survey took

place. .............................................................................................................................. 2-5 Figure 4-1: Map showing the location of alternative forest areas where mushroom/fungi and

collection of herbs could occur. .................................................................................... 4-23

A P P E N D I C E S

Appendix A: Screened-out Ecosystem Services.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 1-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Dundee Precious Metals (DPM) has negotiated an amended financial package with a

consortium of banks for which the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development

(EBRD) acts as environmental agent. According to the EBRD’s Environmental and

Social Policy (2008), and its associated Performance Requirements (PRs), a project of

this type and scale requires a full Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA).

The Project undertook a local national environmental impact assessment (EIA) to

Bulgarian standards in 2010 and an environmental permit No. 18-8, 11/2011 was issue.

Following an independent review of the local EIA reports, the EBRD required a number

of supplementary environmental and social studies and documents to fill the gaps

necessary to meet the EBRD PRs and international good practice. In addition to the

EBRD PRs, some of the consortium banks refer to the Equator Principles and therefore

the Project also references the IFC’s Performances Standards (2012). The package of

supplementary environmental and social documents as well as the local EIA reports

together form the Project ESIA. The Project ESIA is summarised in a Non-Technical

Summary.

The purpose of this report is to present the key findings of the impacts on Ecosystem

services for the Krumovgrad Project Area. This chapter also interlinks with the other

studies where ecosystem services have been assessed.

Ecosystem Services are benefits that ecosystems provide to people, businesses, plants

and animals as well as transporting materials (e.g. water, carbon) and energy (heat)

around the planet (GRI, 2011).

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) provides a classification scheme of these

services:

Provisioning Services – these are goods or products obtained from ecosystems, such

as food, water, timber and other products from plants such as fibre.

Regulating Services – these include benefits obtained from an ecosystem’s control of

natural processes, such as climate regulation, disease control, erosion prevention, water

flow regulation, and protection from natural hazards.

Cultural Services – are the nonmaterial benefits obtained from ecosystems, such as

recreation, spiritual values, and aesthetic enjoyment.

Supporting Services – are the natural processes such as soil formation, nutrient cycling

and primary productivity that maintain other ecosystem services.

In line with the IFC Performance Standards (2012), this chapter identifies and classifies

Ecosystem services in the mine study area, establishing how these services are of

relevance to local communities and are likely to be impacted by the Project. Such

services can cover both spatial and temporal parameters, e.g. community fishing





NOVEMBER 2014


activities (which will usually occur locally) or soil formation processes (which will happen

over many years and over a large spatial area).

In order to compile the Ecosystem Services Baseline and Impact Assessment, this report

draws on the following key documents:

Krumovgrad EIA Report (Petkov, 2010)

Krumovgrad Socio-Economic Survey Results

DenkStatt Social Baseline Report.





NOVEMBER 2014


2.0 APPROACH

2.1 Overview

The approach adopted for the Krumovgrad Gold Project Ecosystem Services

Assessment has closely followed a recently published working paper covering

ecosystem service reviews for impact assessments produced by the World Resources

Institute (WRI, 2011).

This assessment consists of the following phases:

Defining Study Area – in relation to ecosystem service spatial requirements for all

four categories;

Preliminary Assessment Stage – an initial stage to identify priority issues within the

project study area;

Baseline – provides a description of the current baseline conditions at the proposed

mine site and presents the findings of the prioritisation exercise;

Impact Assessment – provides the assessment of impacts on ecosystem services;

Mitigation and Management Measures – provides the mitigation measures and

residual impacts and includes proposals for Management of ecosystem services of

the mine.

2.2 Defining the Study Area

Geographical coverage and extent of the study area was defined on the basis of the

following factors:

the likely distance at which the proposed mine will impact the availability and

functionality of ecosystem services;

the likely distance that people are willing to travel to utilise natural resources on a

regular basis;

water catchment areas likely to be affected by the mine project.

People and communities access natural resources dependent upon a) supply availability;

b) distance to acquire and ability to transport the goods. Supply availability is governed

by a number of factors, for example, demand level of the resource, seasonality, weather

etc. In addition, land and resource ownership will also govern collection of products, as

well as local laws possibly preventing the collection of, for example, wild flowers, plants

(herbs) or firewood.





NOVEMBER 2014


The mode of transport will govern the quantity that can be acquired, the distance

travelled, and the number of trips taken, for example, travel and collection of firewood by

foot would equate to significantly less than if acquired by a vehicle.

Figure 2-1 shows a map of the ecosystem service study area based on, a) the

communities where Household Surveys took place and, b) buffer zone drawn less than

10 km) around those centres defined as the furthest point certain communities will go for

provisional services.





NOVEMBER 2014


Figure 2-1: A map showing the study area for Ecosystem Services in the Krumovgrad

Project Area. The buffer zone is based upon the settlements where the socio-

economic survey took place.





NOVEMBER 2014


2.3 Defining the Ecosystem Services

Ecosystem services applicable to the Project were identified through existing literature

review and as part of the Social Impact Assessment Study. The following ecosystem

services are applicable to the Project:

2.3.1 Provisional Services

A developing mine project can potentially lead to the removal of interconnecting

ecosystems and habitats. Removal of these could impact on availability of natural

resources and products. The following provisional services are applicable to the Project:

Construction materials (timber)

Food (fruits, berries, mushrooms, hunting opportunities etc.)

Water for drinking purposes obtained from wells, streams, springs or smaller dams;

Water for livestock purposes from wells, streams and smaller dams;

Water for irrigation purposes from streams and rivers

2.3.2 Cultural Services

Cultural Services are important in terms of recognising practices currently undertaken,

for example, recreation, sport, hunting, ecotourism together with sites of sacred or

religious meaning or historical context (archaeological).

2.3.3 Regulating Services

Ecosystems also provide regulatory services the role that vegetation plays in reducing

air pollution (e.g. dust and other particulates) and soil erosion.

Provisioning and Regulating Services associated with freshwater and erosion regulation

is covered by the Hydrological and Hydrogeological EIS Chapters. Here, influences may

extend downstream of mine activity. Both the Hydrology and Social EIS Chapters

provide more detailed information on the impact of basins and the communities relying

upon them.

2.3.4 Supporting Services

Supporting Services are ecosystem services which are natural processes such as soil

formation, nutrient recycling and primary productivity that maintains other services.

Supporting services also include storage systems such as soil, carbon and water

(groundwater and surface water catchment areas) and formation systems such as the

development of soil





NOVEMBER 2014


2.4 Preliminary Screening

The purpose of the Preliminary Screening stage is to predict potential priority impacts on

ecosystem services and also identify interlinked drivers of ecosystem change. Priority

Services were identified by field staff visits to the Project area by experienced Social

Impact assessors. In addition, from existing Project related materials, potential priority

impacts were identified.

The predicted priority impacts were categorised into moderate or higher, minor or not

significant. These categories simply acted as potential impact categories used to

determine the level of impact on a service which could occur at construction, operation

and closure stage and should not be confused as final determined impact status.

The drivers of ecosystem change either involve direct, indirect or secondary drivers. The

most significant direct drivers identified by the WRI (2011) are as follows:

Changes in local land use and land cover;

Harvest and resource consumption;

Pollution;

Introduction of invasive species;

Climate change.

Significant indirect drivers were identified by the WRI and include:

demographic;

economic;

sociopolitical;

religious or scientific, technological factors.

In relation to the specific mine activities at Krumovgrad, the above lists have been

focused on the key sources of potential impacts on ecosystem services:

Occupation of land during mine construction and operation – this may result in

habitat loss, degradation and fragmentation, reduced access to resources for

beneficiaries;

Disturbance to habitats and species – including activities that cause disturbance

or habitat degradation as well as introduction of invasive species

Impacts on groundwater and surface water – due to pollution, level of resource

use (e.g. mine abstractions and land use change)

Impacts on availability and quality – of resources due to demographic and

economic changes relating to the influx of people seeking potential employment at

the mine.





NOVEMBER 2014


Table 2-1 presents the results of the preliminary screening stage incorporating

provisional impacts and drivers. The list only includes impacts identified provisionally as

moderate or higher. Ecosystem services deemed non-significant have been screened

out and are not addressed in this chapter. Instead, these are examined in the relevant

bio-physical baseline chapters and in Appendix A.

Minor ecosystem service impacts include:

Timber (provisioning service)

Honey harvesting

Forest habitats acting as disease and pest regulators (regulating service).

Those identified as Not Significant in terms of ecosystem impacts include:

Forest habitats as regulators of air quality (regulating service).

The purpose of the screening assessment is to identify activities associated with the

Project which may impact on ecosystem services within the direct and indirect (outer

perimeters) of the Project. Potentially significant impacts resulting from the screening

assessment will be further assessed during the impact assessment based in the baseline

information and the outcome of the household survey data. The outcome of the impact

assessment is included in Section 4.0.





NOVEMBER 2014


Table 2-1: Preliminary Screening Assessment

Category of Service Service Service Detail Examples Drivers of Change associated with the mine

Predicted Potential Impact within Project Area: Moderate or Higher

Provisioning Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFP)

Various consumable food products

Wild fruits and vegetables, nuts, mushrooms, herbs, medicinal plants, honey. Occupation of land Disturbance to habitats and species Demographic and economic change

Provisioning – direct footprint NTFP Wood Collect and use for firewood. Occupation of land Disturbance of habitats and species Demographic and economic change

Provisioning – outer boundaries Food Crop cultivation Agricultural activities practised as a primary livelihood by households. Potential Impact on surface water quality and quantity Disturbance to habitats and species Demographic and economic change

Provisioning – outer boundaries Food Livestock rearing E.g. Poultry, Cattle, Occupation of land Potential Impacts on surface water quality Demographic and economic change

Provisioning – outer boundaries Water Domestic, agricultural, construction use sourced from groundwater wells or streams and rivers

Water use for consumption Impacts on surface water quality Demographic and economic change

Cultural – direct footprint and outer boundaries

Spiritual or religious value, aesthetic value

Archaeological Sites of importance, Landscape (aesthetic value)

Cultural landmarks, and potentially historic (forts) and religious sites (ancient temples) are often associated with rivers, rock formations, and natural features (including aesthic landscape values where cultural value is placed on landscapes or landmarks.

Occupation of land Impacts on surface water quality Access to religious sites Disturbance to habitats and species Demographic and economic change

Provisioning – direct footprint and outer boundaries

Food Hunting of animals and birds Wild game hunted for food and sale Occupation of land by Mine

Provisioning – outer boundaries Food Wild fish caught Inland fishing in rivers, streams, Potential Impact on surface water quality and quantity Disturbance to habitats and species Demographic and economic change

Cultural Traditional Practices Activities Cultural value placed on traditional practices such as hunting, fishing, hiking, crafts and use of natural resources

Occupation of land Disturbance to habitats and species Impacts on surface water quality and quantity Demographic and economic change

Regulating Erosion regulation Forest and other vegetation systems

Forest and riparian habitats regulate erosion and sediment delivery to streams and are particularly important on steep slopes where erosion potential is high

Occupation of land Demographic and economic change Impacts on surface water quality and quantity

Supporting Nutrient cycling processes Forest and other habitat types Forest and surface vegetation are significant components of nutrient cycling processes acting as a storage and release mechanisms.

Occupation of land Disturbance to habitats and species Impacts on surface water quality and quantity

Supporting Soil formation processes Forest and other habitats Organic matter in forests and other surface vegetation are key components of soil formation through the breakdown and recycling of decaying organic matter, development and storage.

Occupation of land Disturbance to habitats and species

Supporting Water cycling Precipitation/ground and surface water

Hydrological and hydrogeological transportation and storage systems are important in terms of the water cycle and recycling

Occupation of land Impacts on surface water quality and quantity





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 2-10

2.5 Baseline methodology

The information and data sources for the ecosystem service baseline have been sought

from other EIS chapters, e.g. culture, soils, water etc. and specifically from work

undertaken by the Social Team including the stakeholder engagement and the socio-

economic survey (Denkstatt, 2014).

The various EIS Chapter data include bio-physical data collected through field studies

conducted in 2010. These studies provide quantitative and qualitative information which

was used for the ecosystem service baseline. In some cases, this information has been

insufficient in order to complete the analysis and therefore expert judgement has been

utilised together with further engagement with the ESIA specialists concerned in order to

generate an accurate characterisation.

The main output of the ecosystem service baseline has been to produce qualitative

information and the assumptions made have been based upon ecosystem service

importance as well as their sensitivities. The baseline produced is to a certain degree a

dynamic assessment which will change over the development and lifetime of the project

and can therefore be refined to advise the project further.

Prior to the first round of stakeholder engagement and more specifically the socio-

economic survey, subject areas and questions were devised in order to identify priority

ecosystem services. In addition, opportunities were given to review the standard socio-

economic survey subject areas and further requests were made to refine the survey in

order to address more specific areas relating to priority systems.

Ongoing stakeholder engagement and possibly specific ecosystem service surveys (if

required) may assist in refining understanding of ecosystem services in the vicinity of the

project area.

2.5.1 Ecosystem Service Importance and Replaceability

Importance of ecosystem services to beneficiaries, is assessed (Table 2-2) according to

the following criteria and assigned a rating from low to essential:

1. Intensity of use – e.g. daily, weekly, seasonal use of a provisioning service; number

of downstream villages reliant on erosion or flood control services;

2. Scope of use – e.g. household level vs village level; subsistence use, trade or both;

3. Geographic proximity (where possible), and

4. Degree of dependence: e.g. contribution of self-caught fish or game to total protein

in the diet, rating from low – high.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 2-11

Replaceability of ecosystem service is assessed according to the following criteria and

assigned a rating from low – high:

1. The existence of spatial alternatives (other sites where the same ecosystem service

is also provided and that are close enough to be utilised by affected communities);

and

2. The sustainability of spatial alternatives given the potential for increased resource

use, including a consideration of other users and the existing status and threats to

the resource.

Table 2-2: Assessing the value of Ecosystem Services

Replaceability / Resilience of Service

High

(many spatial alternatives)

Moderate

(some spatial alternatives)

Low

(few to no spatial alternatives)

Imp

ort

an

ce

of

se

rvic

e t

o b

en

efi

cia

ries

Lo

w

Low Low Medium

Mo

de

rate

Low Medium High

Hig

h

Medium High Critical

Es

se

nti

al

High Critical Critical

2.5.2 Ecosystem Services Prioritisation

Prioritisation of ecosystem services is an important part of the assessment and is also

required to meet IFC standards regarding impacts and mitigation measures for

ecosystem services. IFC PS 6 requires the following:

With respect to impacts on priority ecosystem services of relevance to Affected

Communities and where the client has direct management control or significant

influence over such ecosystem services, adverse impacts should be avoided. If





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 2-12

these impacts are unavoidable, the client will minimize them and implement

mitigation measures that aim to maintain the value and functionality of priority

systems.

The first step in the prioritisation process has been to scope out ecosystem services

according to the potential significance of Project impacts.

The second step in the prioritization process is undertaken as part of the baseline

analysis. Through the analysis of baseline data and stakeholder feedback on ecosystem

services, each service is assigned a value rating reflecting the importance to

beneficiaries and availability of alternatives (replaceability) of the service.

Ecosystem services of high – critical value that are expected to be impacted by the

proposed mine are considered ‘priority’ ecosystem services. For these services, the

project will design mitigation measures to maintain or restore the value and functionality

of the service.

Ecosystem services of medium value are still considered of relevance to beneficiaries

and are included in the impact assessment in less detail. Ecosystem services of low

value to beneficiaries are scoped out of the assessment.

2.5.3 Impact Assessment Approach and Methods

The assessment of ecosystem services impacts has followed the overall impact

assessment methodology described in Chapter 7 of the ESIA. These steps include:

assigning the sensitivity / value of a receptor; prediction of the magnitude of impacts;

evaluation of their significance; development of mitigation measures; and assessment of

residual impact.

The significance of the impact is assessed according to the value / sensitivity of the

receptor and the magnitude of the impact (Table 2-3).

In the case of ecosystem services, the baseline analysis has produced a list of priority

ecosystem services for which the mine must design mitigation measures that aim to

maintain or restore the value and functionality of the service for beneficiaries.

Compensation or replacement services are provided in the interim or where full

restoration is not possible (e.g. some landscape or cultural impacts). For non-priority

ecosystem services that are nonetheless adversely impacted by the project, standard

mitigation measures are proposed that are designed to avoid, or where this is not

possible, reduce or compensate for the impact.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 2-13

Table 2-3: Evaluating Significance of Impacts on Ecosystem Services

Magnitude of Impact

Negligible Small Medium Large

Impacts are within the normal range of variation.

Impacts result in a small reduction in the availability or functionality of ecosystem service and/or has implications for a small number of people relative to the population within the area of influence.

The impact results in a moderate reduction in the availability or functionality of the ecosystem service and/or has implications for a substantial number of people relative to the population within the area of influence. Does not threaten the long-term viability of the service.

The impact results in the loss of all or significant proportion of the availability or functionality of an ecosystem service and/or has implications for the majority of people within the area of influence. The long-term viability of the service is threatened.

Va

lue

of

Re

ce

pto

r

Negligible Ecosystem service is of negligible importance to beneficiaries.

Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant

Low

Ecosystem service is of low importance to beneficiaries (local, regional and global) or is of moderate importance but with many spatial alternatives available.

Not significant Not significant Minor Moderate

Medium

Ecosystem service has moderate importance to beneficiaries and moderate replaceability (some spatial alternatives), high importance to beneficiaries and many spatial alternatives, or low importance and few to no spatial alternatives.

Not significant Minor Moderate Major

High

Ecosystem service is of high importance to beneficiaries and has moderate replaceability (some spatial alternatives); is of moderate importance to beneficiaries and has few or no spatial alternatives; or is essential to beneficiaries but has many spatial alternatives.

Not significant Moderate Major Critical

Critical

Ecosystem service is of high importance to beneficiaries and has few to no spatial alternatives; or the service is of high to essential importance and has moderate to low replaceability.

Not significant Major Critical Critical





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 3-14

3.0 BASELINE CHARACTERISATION AND ANALYSIS

3.1 Introduction

The following tables (Table 3-1 to Table 3-4) provide an overview of the ecosystem

services identified through the earlier screening exercise as potentially impacted by the

mine and then assessed against the socio-economic survey results and other information

sources. Each ecosystem service is assessed for the importance of the service to

beneficiaries and the availability of spatial alternatives.

The analysis of ecosystem services uses the descriptions of habitat categories (REF:

EIS report) in order to provide an assessment of impacts on human beneficiaries of the

ecosystem services interlinked with the different habitats located around the project site:

Forest – and woodland areas are a source of provisioning services such as collection

of firewood and charcoal, construction timber, non-timber forest products such as

natural medicines, oils and nuts and hunting for leisure or for meat consumption.

Freshwater – including marshes and wetlands, streams and rivers and riparian

forests and woodlands. These areas are likely to be used for drinking water, fishing,

bathing and washing clothes.

Semi-natural – including hay and grazing meadows, agricultural fields for growing

crops,

The settlements which are most at risk from losses in natural resources, due to close

proximity to the proposed mine development include:

Skalak

Ovchari

Emphasis is placed on these locations in terms of the impact assessment as they are

linked to the Household Survey. However, other smaller communities (or even individual

homes) may also be impacted upon, for example, the village of Synap which may

maintain agricultural land at the foot of the mine.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 3-15

Table 3-1: Provisioning Services in the Mine Area of Influence

Service Description Additional Information (including status, threats and availability of alternatives to the service)

Relevant Habitats Importance to beneficiaries Replaceability

Collection of mushrooms/fungi

Collection of mushrooms/fungi provides additional nutrition and protein which is important for overall health and well-being. This activity may be undertaken by older generations with greater knowledge of edible species available around them.

While removal of some areas currently available for collection of mushrooms/fungi will decrease availability, current surrounding forested areas provide sufficient supply to maintain a relatively high percentage of Ecosystem Service (ES) provisional demands. From the two settlements close to the proposed mine development, Ovchari and Skalak villages the results from the socio-economic survey show that the number of people undertaking mushroom/fungi collecting as part of an economic activity is minimal (one person from Skalak; no one from Ovchari). The one person from Skalak does consider this to be an important activity contributing towards their annual income. More people in Kuklitsa village undertake mushroom picking, but this village is further south and the project will not likely impact on their activities.

Forest, Semi-natural

Low – This is a seasonal

activity undertaken in the spring and autumn months in close-by forested areas. It is an activity that is undertaken for trade, however, dependence is low as other foods may provide the same or similar source of nutrition. The socio-economic survey indicates that extremely low numbers of people undertake this activity within the ecosystem service study area.

Moderate - spatial alternatives are dependent upon

availability and demand. People undertaking this activity may increase but the sustainability is low due to the nature of the season and natural availability. The individual from Skalak would still be able to access forested lands immediately south of the village where no project related impacts will occur, while the individual from Ovchari will still be able to access sufficient forested land to the north of their village.

Collection of herbs

Collection of herbs possibly for nutrition or for medicinal purposes may be important for overall health and well-being.

This activity may be undertaken in forested as well as semi-natural areas (meadows etc.). Removal of some places due to mine development could decrease locations where herbs can be collected. Some species may be uncommon and only found in certain areas. No one in Ovchari undertakes collection of herbs. In Skalak village, one person considers this an important activity which contributes towards their annual income. This is also an important activity especially in Edrino and Kuklitsa villages. It is possible that villages from Edrino are accessing forest in the proposed mine footprint while Kuklitsa lies further south and would require more effort to collect from the proposed mine footprint, thus is more likely they collect locally to their village. For one person in Edrino village this is a significant contributor towards their income but is not likely to be affected by the project. Six respondents from Zvanarka also collect herbs but do not consider it to be an important economic activity but again are less likely to be affected.


Low – This is a seasonal

activity undertaken in the spring, summer and early autumn months. While it is an activity undertaken for trade, dependence is low as only 20 people collect herbs.


availability and demand. People undertaking this activity may increase but the sustainability is low due to the nature of the season and natural availability. The individual from Skalak would still be able to access forested lands immediately south of the village and could access lands south of the river in spring and summer months.

Fishing Fishing is a source of free food and does provide a minor income for a small number of people and could provide a recreational activity near to the Project Area.

Availability of suitable fishing habitats is quite high in terms of streams and river water courses, however, seasonality may mean that flow occurs only in autumn, winter and early spring months. This may severely restrict which fish species use these local rivers, especially medium to large fish which are more suitable for the human diet. Response from the socio-economic survey indicates that this is activity is not undertaken by many people (nine respondents in total). Only one person in Ovchari village fishes and no one in Skalak. Four people fish in Kuklitsa but overall no one considers it to be an important economic activity.

Freshwater Low – Fishing is not an

extensive activity undertaken by many people. Instead, a few people undertake which may supplement their income. There are a number of rivers where fishing can take place, for example along the main river of Krumovitza. Dependence is low, maybe due to sufficient supplies of fresh fish from coastal towns or from preserved fish available in supermarkets.

High - Other nearby streams and rivers remain available

for fishing. Rivers like Arda and Kesebir dere.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 3-16



Hunting Hunting is a recreational activity with the added advantage to serve as source of food and may provide a minor income in the Project Area The Household Survey indicates that limited dependence exists on any income derived from hunting.

Development of the proposed project area will remove a large expanse of forest/woodland which may be habitat to game such as, rabbit, pigeon, hog etc. and cover licensed hunting areas. The socio-economic survey, however, reveals that this activity is only undertaken by a small number of people who do not obtain a significant level of income. Three respondents replied, one from Ovchari and no one in Skalak. Two people from villages further afield.

Forest, Freshwater, Semi-natural

Low – This maybe seasonal

activity undertaken in the summer and early autumn months. While it is an activity undertaken for trade, dependence is low as less than five people hunt.


availability and demand. People undertaking this activity may increase but the sustainability is low due to the nature of the season and natural availability. Hunting by the individual in the affected area may require additional membership of other hunting groups in order to hunt elsewhere due to the licensing system in place.

Crop cultivation Crop cultivation is practiced at a subsistence or commercial scale, providing various food products for consumption and/or trade. Crops include tobacco, peppers, onion, potatoes, tomatoes etc.

Direct impacts on farming livelihoods are not likely as the proposed mine is currently situated within an area of forest/woodland. Crop cultivation is practiced by 63 respondents who were interviewed out of 396 in total (or 15.9%) and stated their occupation as farmers. Of these, only four in Ovchari village and one in Skalak village are farmers, however, 33% in Ovchari and 36% in Skalak village practice crop cultivation. The most common crop grown is tobacco and vegetables representing 128 respondents out of 396 or 32%. Land is used for various purposes. Across the region, 119 respondents representing 83% of 143 households questioned, use their land for arable purposes. 49 or 34% use land for pasture, 8 respondents or 5.59% use it for forestry. In relation to directly affected or areas very close to the proposed mine development, 13 respondents or 93% in Ovchari and 11 respondents or 100% in Skalak use their land for arable purposes. Seven respondents or 50% from Ovchari and 2 respondents or 18% from Skalak use land as pasture. Regarding, land used for forests, 2 respondents or 14% are from Ovchari and no one in Skalak. Another important factor is the distance of land owned from their homes. While the socio-economic data does not precisely identify where land is owned, the question asked is the distance from their home, therefore it could be possible that land is owned away from the proposed impact area. Focusing on the two villages closest to the proposed development, most respondents stated that land is owned within less than 1 km (Ovchari, 92% and Skalak, 45%). While only two respondents from each village own land further afield (1.1-5 km) and one person owns land between 5.1 and 10 km (in Skalak) and one person in Ovchari owns land beyond 10 km.

Semi-natural High – a traditional activity

that may require daily or weekly attention. Cultivation of crops provides fresh vegetables and fruits which may be consumed by the household or traded.

High – However, not applicable as no farms are within

the proposed development area





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 3-17



Livestock Land in and around settlements is currently used for grazing for animals. Obviously some settlements and livestock owners will also have space set aside for keeping animals safe with secured areas. These could potentially be impacted by vehicle movements, noise etc. Communal grazing areas and land owned for grazing also occur close to the project development zone, these grazing places may be subject to potential mine-related impacts, such as air pollution and noise. This is especially the case for Ovchari and Skalak villages where livestock owners use free grazing areas on nearby hills and mountains for grazing.

Across the region, 99 respondents out of a total of 396 from the social-economic survey own livestock. Animal husbandry and keeping livestock is practiced throughout the Project Area, however is more prevalent in the smaller communities In Ovchari, eight respondents and in Skalak, five occupants keep livestock. To the south, Kuklitsa village, sixteen respondents have livestock while in Guliya village, 15 respondents do. In terms of economic importance, four occupants of Ovchari village declare that it provides an income while in Skalak, three respondents do. One person in Skalak owns more than 16 cattle. Similarly, other villages also declare that it is an important economic activity; however, these are further away from the proposed project site. People also retain animals for subsistence purposes with 124 respondents replying they own cattle, 112 poultry and 32, sheep. The socio-economic questionnaire also asks whether livestock are allowed to roam on free grazing pasture land on hills and the mountain. In Ovchari village, 15 respondents answered yes, while in Skalak village, 6 respondents said yes.


High - as indicated, in some

settlements, animal husbandry is a traditional activity requiring daily attention. Livestock provide a fresh source of protein. Most animals will remain close to a settlement or household, foraging for food within a vicinity of 1 km. Others may be led to common pasture lands to graze.

High - surrounding land can be used for grazing.

Drinking water The availability and access to reliable and clean drinking water is one of the fundamental services required by communities. Poor quality water is often the cause of the spread of disease.

Many of the communities in the Project Area do have access to a piped water network from a safe and secure centralised supply. However, some individuals still obtain water from wells, rain harvesting or pumped from the river. In the two villages close to the proposed project development, one person in Ovchari obtains water from a well, while eight respondents do in Skalak and only one by rain harvesting. No one from these villages obtains drinking water from the river. However, in Edrino, Malko Kamenyane, Kuklitsa and Guliya more people access water through wells. Studies show that groundwater pollution will be unlikely, surface water run-off will however need to be managed correctly to ensure no surface water run-off does not contaminate surface water resources

Freshwater

Essential - water is required

on a daily basis and needs to be obtained from a nearby clean source. Water is used at both household and village level. People within the Project Area will be highly dependent upon a local supply.


availability of water bodies and courses and settlements are dependent upon close proximity. The sustainability of use will be dependent upon the new size and the level of requirement per head. Villagers at Skalak and Ovchari that continue to use wells are positioned at a higher elevation than the project thus no impacts are likely to occur to shallow wells. Villagers from Edrino, Malko, Kamenyane, Kuklitsa and Guliya are further afield and positioned on different hydrological basin unlikely to be impacted by the project.

Firewood Local communities may make use natural resources where they are readily available in the Project Area. Collecting of firewood for heating is the most common use of natural resources in all of the communities within the ES area assessed.

Collection of firewood is undertaken by 80 respondents from a total of 385 spread across 11 communities. Six occupants from Ovchari village and seven occupants from Skalak village collect wood. This is comparatively low with people who buy firewood and others that collect it from nearby villages e.g. Kuklitsa (19), Guliya (16) and Zvanarka (16). All of these latter settlements are a further distance from the mine development with other alternative areas available. The fact that some people collect wood could indicate economic vulnerability in that they are unable to afford to purchase wood.

Forest Essential – firewood is

required on a regular basis in order to provide heat and to cook food.

High – other nearby spatial alternative areas exist which

do not overlap with other communities needs.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 3-18

Table 3-2: Cultural Services in the Mine Area of Influence



Cultural heritage Cultural Heritage in the Krumovgrad area is steeped in a long and rich history spanning multi-ages from ancient times (Thracian), through the middle ages and Bulgarian Revival. As a result, the cultural landscape features many links to the past. In addition, local inhabitants celebrate and remember these cultural links through festivals and song and dance.

Archaeological remains of buildings such as ancient temples, fortresses, cemeteries and tombs remain in the area and vicinity of the project. They are of current interest to local inhabitants, national as well as international historians and archaeologists. It is possible that some locations maybe impacted.

N/A High – links to important eras in

the past are still celebrated today. Local festivals are held and history is kept alive in song and dance.

Low – Archaeological remains as well

as current historical links to such sites remains high.

Traditional cultural practices

The socio-economic survey underlines that now only a few occupants participate in traditional cultural practices and values such as hunting, fishing, crafts and use of natural resources.

Removal of habitat which supports such cultural activities will impact on a minority of individuals. However, suitable nearby areas remain where these activities can still be practiced.

Forest, Freshwater Low – requirement for

provisional ecosystem services is low and will not affect the day-to-day activities of local communities.

High – locations to the north, south-

east and west of the proposed development area may provide new opportunities.

Table 3-3: Regulating Services in the Mine Area of Influence



Soil formation Soil formation occurs through natural erosion processes and the build-up of organic material together with the processes of micro-fauna. Loss of soil or a reduction in soil formation processes) is extremely costly to any operation, and is generally only evident at closure or when rehabilitation operations are compromised, but plays an ever increasing role in the water quality and utilisation potential of streams and rivers that are of primary concern to many of the rural communities in and around the mining project. Vegetation cover binds soil and prevents soil loss thus acting as a regulating measure.

Uncontrolled erosion of soils into streams and rivers will have an impact on community use in terms of utilisation of water Project development and installation of infrastructure will lead to removal of vegetation, thus increase vulnerability to erosion with potential for pollution of streams and rivers. Controls include Soil Management Plan, Biodiversity Management Plan (vegetation buffers etc.) Water Management Plan


High - vegetation buffers and

other installed mitigation measures are especially important during seasonal periods when rainfall quantities increase, duration and intensity can all increase and thereby mobilise soil.

Moderate - certain catchment areas will

be affected where attention needs to be focused.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 3-19

Table 3-4: Supporting Services in the Mine Area of Influence

Service Description Additional Information (including status, threats

and availability of alternatives to the service)


Nutrient

retention

Woodlands and forests are extremely efficient at retaining

nutrients (closed-systems) which are stored either in soil,

bacteria and other primitive life forms, vegetation (e.g. Leaf,

woody materials etc.) and fauna components (e.g. animals

and released through dying or dead organic matter and are

transported via water and erosion processes). Natural

changes e.g. fire, wind and human influences e.g. clearances,

logging, disturbances to the surface will lead to an outflow of

nutrients from the ecosystem.

Increases in nutrients in water courses will lead to

changes in flora and fauna composition as natural

community compositions are distorted due to an over-

stimulation of nutrients favouring some species over

others that prefer steady-state or oligotroph (low

nutrient) environments. As a result, key species or

species sensitive to chemical changes can be lost.

Eutrophication of water courses leads to a detrimental

change in water chemistry increasing primarily Nitrates

and Phosphates, over-stimulating certain algae (phyto-

plankton and macroalgae), leading to a depletion of

oxygen causing a further reduction of aquatic flora and

fauna.

Forest Medium - the area where

mining is going to take place is

relatively small therefore

nutrient loss will be minimal.

Moderate - removal of forest habitat will

lead to a loss of nutrients captured in the

soils in this specific area of mining

infrastructure.

Hydrological

cycle

The hydrological cycle describes a supporting system

whereby water is in a state of continuous motion above and

below the surface of the Earth. It is an exchange of energy

closely integrated with the climate of the planet. On a local

scale within the Project Area, removing moisture (evaporation)

and receiving moisture (condensation and precipitation) is

experienced. Water is stored (ponds, wetlands/swamp) and

soaks into the ground) and is also transported off the surface

via streams and rivers.

Changes to the ground surface can greatly influence

the water cycle of the site. Removal of vegetation

reduces evaporation and affect local temperatures

Forest, Freshwater Essential - water is available to

people as well as flora and

fauna on a local scale within the

Project Area. It is required on a

frequent basis (daily) and a

local basis due to its weight in

transportation.

Low - modifications to the surface will

potentially lead to localised impacts,

however, not all areas are affected and

potential remains for areas to continuing

operating without change.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 3-20

3.2 Ecosystem Services Prioritisation

Table 3-5 summarises the importance and replaceability assigned to potentially impacted

ecosystem services in the baseline assessment.

An additional evaluation is added in terms of ‘value rating’ (column 3). This is a final

screening exercise and the list of priority ecosystem services is evaluated in terms of

whether these services represent an unsustainable use of available resources. Only

value ratings of High and Critical will be taken forward into assessment of impacts.

Table 3-5: Ecosystem Services Prioritisation

Ecosystem Service Importance to

affected community1 Replaceability2 Value Rating3

Provisioning Services

Food: Collecting mushrooms/fungi

Low Moderate Low

Food: collection of herbs Low Moderate Low

Food: Fishing Low High Low

Food: Hunting Low Moderate Low

Crop cultivation High High Medium

Livestock rearing High High Medium

Drinking water Essential Moderate Critical

Cultural Services

Cultural heritage sites of importance

High Low Medium

Traditional practices and activities

Low High Medium

Regulating Services

Erosion control High Moderate High

Supporting Services

Nutrient cycling processes

High Moderate High

Soil formation processes High Moderate High See Table 2-2 – Col. 1 Importance of Service to Beneficiaries, Col. 2 Replaceability / Resilience of Service.

3.3 Mine Dependencies on Ecosystem Services

Mine activities can also place pressures on ecosystem services and with some services

the mine will be highly dependent, e.g. freshwater. Design measures will be in place to

reduce some of these Project induced pressures (Table 3-6), for example, maximising

Project water recycle and introducing protocols such as a no hunting policy for all staff.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 3-21

Table 3-6: Ecosystem services dependencies of mine project

Service Description

Additional information (incl. status, threats and availability of alternatives)

Relevant Habitats

Importance to Project*

Replaceability*

Freshwater (Provisional Service)

Mine requirement for plant water supply, haul road dust suppression, construction water, potable water, vehicle wash

Increased availability during autumn/winter months and decreases in supply during spring/summer months

Surface water bodies (streams, rivers, wetlands), ground water

Essential Moderate

Soil (Provisional Service)

Mine reliance on soil as a medium to close project areas of development.

Failure to remove or protect soil prior to project construction will lead to soil requirements at project closure

Terrestrial habitats

Essential Moderate

Erosion processes (Regulating Service)

Mine reliance on vegetation areas to provide natural erosion control measures to protect roads and mine infrastructure

Removal of vegetation will potentially increase erosion

Forest, surface water bodies (streams, rivers, wetlands)

High Moderate

3.3.1 Mine Ecosystem Services Prioritisation

A summary of the importance and replaceability of ecosystem services that relate to the

mine dependency is presented in Table 3-7. The same process has been adopted as in

Table 3-5 and follows the same process carried out for potentially impacted ecosystem

services, i.e., services with a high – critical value rating are considered priority services

for the mine.

Table 3-7: Ecosystem Prioritisation Table – Mine site

Ecosystem Service Importance to affected community1

Replaceability2 Value Rating


Freshwater Essential Moderate Critical

Soil Essential Moderate Critical

Regulating Services

Erosion processes High Moderate High

See Table 2-2 – Col. 1 Importance of Service to Beneficiaries, Col. 2 Replaceability / Resilience of Service





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 4-22

4.0 ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS

4.1 Introduction

Over the lifetime of the mine, it is expected that there will be a range of impacts on

ecosystem services in the mine area of influence, with implications for the livelihoods,

health, culture and wellbeing of communities within this area.

4.2 Potential Impacts on Provisional Services

4.2.1 Mushroom/Fungi collection

While the overall impact assessment for this activity is deemed not significant, the

household survey indicated that one individual from Skalak village close to the proposed

mine development area will be potentially affected. While this is an important economic

activity for this one individual, other nearby areas are available (Figure 4-1). More details

on this activity are to be found in the SIA report.

Given the very low numbers of people undertaking mushroom/fungi collection, it is not

anticipated that this activity will impact on nearby biodiversity (fungi) or ecosystems

(forest ecosystem) or other peoples collection areas as there is sufficient coverage of

nearby forested land.

The resulting potential impact is Not Significant.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 4-23

Figure 4-1: Map showing the location of alternative forest areas where mushroom/fungi and

collection of herbs could occur.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 4-24

4.2.2 Collection of herbs

Herb collection may supplement nutrition as well as provide medicines from a host of

plant species found in the wild. Knowledge on these species may be restricted to older

generations. Collection of herbs may occur in a number of habitats including

woodland/forest, meadows, river corridors etc.

In the immediate project vicinity and proposed development area, few people undertake

collection of herbs, however, those that do consider it to be an important economic

activity. While only one person in Skalak collects herbs and no one in Ovchari, others in

villages further afield do, for example, Edrino and Kuklitsa villages. However, in order to

access the proposed project development area, more physical effort would be required

than other suitable areas close by.

Areas of forested land (Figure 4-1) remain south-east of Skalak and north and south of

Ovchari which are not expected to be impacted by the project. These areas are

sufficiently large enough in order to offset specific loss from the Project impact area.


4.2.3 Fishing

Similar to mushroom/fungi collection, only one individual from Ovchari village fishes in

nearby rivers/streams and for them, this is not an important activity.

Four villagers from Kuklitsa village also fish but again, for them this is not an important

economic activity and they are further away from the proposed mine impact area,

however, are downstream of the mine.


4.2.4 Hunting

Only one individual hunts from Ovchari village and for them this is not an important

economic activity. Two others also hunt from Kuklitsa village which is further south of the

proposed mine development. The SIA report contains more specific information on

hunting activities by local people which is specifically licensed by area.


4.2.5 Crop cultivation

Crop cultivation covers a range of crops that are grown for personal as well as for trade

in local communities and major nearby settlements. A range of crops are grown from

tobacco, peppers, onion, tomatoes and many other fruits and vegetables. Indeed, many





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 4-25

respondents are involved in one or more crop cultivation, for example, 328 respondents

from a total of 396 questioned grow onions. The majority of farmers grow crops close to

their homes, with only a few farmers owning land further afield.

In relation to direct impacts, the proposed development is currently located on natural

forest and/or woodland. Most if not all grazing and agriculture areas will not be directly

impacted, though some areas may be exposed to indirect impacts such as air pollution

(dust and other particulates).

Appropriate mitigation measures to address indirect impacts could include using existing

forest trees beside tracks as dust suppressants as well as use of water tanker,

consideration of road/track materials in order to reduce particulate matter and dust.


4.2.6 Livestock

Livestock is kept and maintained by many villagers for subsistence and economic

purposes, including those in close proximity to the proposed project area (Ovchari and

Skalak villages). It is an important economic activity for some with larger herds and/or

stocks of animals. Some villagers also use additional areas in the hills and mountains to

graze their animals. The proposed mine project will likely impact on this activity requiring

these livestock owners to seek alternative areas for grazing. This is especially the case

for villagers in Skalak. However, existing forested land will still remain south of this village

which will not be impacted by the Project. In addition, the river does not act as a barrier

in late spring and summer months when river flows are significantly reduced, therefore

allowing livestock to cross and access forest.

The Project will also need to include assessing risks to local livestock in terms of straying

animals, road/track access points, animals in roads, animals used for transportation

(horse and cart) together with Project related vehicle movements. Use of warning

signage, staff Safety, Health and Environment inductions to warn vehicle drivers of the

potential for animals will need to be considered. In addition, fencing and fence

maintenance may be necessary. Further information can be found in the Framework

Traffic Management Plan.


4.2.7 Drinking water

The availability of sufficient and clean freshwater is critical to sustaining human life,

preventing water related diseases, irrigating crops, sustaining livestock and maintaining

habitat for freshwater fish.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 4-26

Mine activities may have a potential direct impact on freshwater supply due to

consumption of water resources by the mine and changes in water quality in catchments

downstream of mining activities.

A small amount of individuals still obtain drinking water through either collecting supplies

from either shallow wells or from the river. In total eight respondents use wells in Skalak

which is close to the proposed development but only one person uses a well in Ovchari,

however, these villages are located higher than the proposed project area, therefore

impacts on shallow wells are not envisaged. Further afield (Edrino, Malko-Kamenvane,

Kuklitsa and Gulia more people use wells but these are not likely to be affected as these

villages are located on different water bodies.

It does not look like people use the river to collect sources of water for drinking. One

individual from Kuklitsa does but it is not known which river. This is also further upstream

from the project site.

Implementation of the Mine Water Management Plan will also address surface water run-

off and mobilisation of soil through suitable methods located throughout the Project area

thus avoiding impacts on running waters (rivers, streams).

In terms of sensitivity and that a small number of people continue to use wells to source

their drinking water from, the resulting potential impact is Minor.

4.3 Potential Impacts on Cultural Services

4.3.1 Spiritual, religious and aesthetic values

Spiritual and religious sites may include current cultural ties with churches, cemeteries

and other places of remembrance. It may also include archaeological and historic

features in the landscape which should be surveyed in detail prior to removal or

deconstruction. The main Social Impact Assessment (SIA) report provides more detailed

information on spiritual and religious sites and it is proposed not to replicate that

assessment in this report. Refer to the Cultural Heritage and Archaeological Resources

and Cultural Values section of the SIA for a full list of proposed mitigation measures.

The Project site also holds aesthetic value in terms of local recreational and leisure use

though not to a significant degree. Access to other nearby areas will also continue to be

available. As above, refer to the SIA report for full details on cultural, aesthetic and

recreational values.

Residual impact after mitigation will reduce to Not Significant.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 4-27

4.3.2 Cultural traditional practices

Only a small number of individuals still practice traditional activities in the area of the

proposed mine site, impacting on hunting, herb collection etc. Other suitable nearby

areas remain where these activities will still be able to be practiced. As above, refer to

the SIA report for full details on cultural, aesthetic and recreational values.


4.4 Potential Impacts on Regulating Services

4.4.1 Erosion regulation

This section discusses potential impacts on erosion regulation services provided by

natural vegetation. As an intermediate service, natural vegetation contributes to

freshwater quality, erosion-related impacts on TSS and water quality in catchments

utilised by local communities (Rio Tinto, 2012). Other potential impacts not captured in

the freshwater quality analysis may include decreases in slope stability and soil quality

in the mine area. Erosion regulation does not have natural replacements but restoration

of vegetation can return the service to its original function. Vegetation in the area is

generally fast growing and resilient to change. Replaceability of the service is therefore

considered medium and the service is considered of high value overall.

Activities during the construction and operation phases will result in clearing of vegetation

on catchment slopes in the mine area, resulting in a moderate reduction in erosion

regulation provided by these habitats. Given the potential for high rainfall, the loss of

natural regulation services in addition to any erosion directly caused by mine activities

would be a concern. Ground disturbance during construction and pit excavation may

increase the potential for erosion. Activities include pre-stripping within the open pit

areas, haul road construction, mineral waste emplacement preparation and general

construction activities.

The resulting potential impact on water supplies is anticipated to be High.

4.5 Potential Impacts on Supporting Services

4.5.1 Potential impacts on soil formation processes

Forest and other habitats contribute to soil formation processes with natural vegetation

providing a source of organic matter which is broken down and recycled. Soil is critical

for agricultural activities and once vegetation is removed, is quickly lost. Mining activities

may lead to compaction, blending of top-soil with sub-soils, and de-nitrification leading

to infertile soils. Mining dusts may also change the constituents of soil, increasing

contaminants as well as changing the texture of soil. Pollutants may also inhibit soil-

forming processes (Wong, 2003). Impacts from run-off also reduce the fertility of soil.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 4-28

However, the most important factor is the removal of vegetation that protect soil and

enrich it with additional organic material.

The resulting potential impact on soil formation is anticipated to be High.

4.5.2 Potential impacts on water cycle

Watersheds have a big impact on the water cycle, and mining developments and

activities cause significant change to the water cycle. Potential impacts include reduced

flow in nearby rivers from watercourse removal which could lead to further impacts such

as sedimentation and erosion, and changes in riverbed could lead to impacts on

freshwater flora and fauna. Impacts to groundwater through lack of recharge could

impact on communities dependent upon wells. Changes to the natural vegetation cover

(e.g. forests) will lead to impacts on evapotranspiration affecting spatial and temporal

rainfall variations. Paving of land also reduces the ability for water to soak away and thus

can overload watercourses in flood situations. Other impacts to local communities may

include alterations to irrigation practices (Conradin, 2012).

The resulting potential impact on water cycle is anticipated to be High.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 5-29

5.0 MITIGATION MEASURES AND RESIDUAL IMPACTS

5.1 Introduction

The following section provides a description of mitigation measures and predicted

residual impacts on ecosystem services in the mine study area, including mitigation of

impacts on the following:

Drinking water supply;

Erosion control;

Nutrient cycling processes;

Non-priority ecosystem services (see Appendix A).

Due to the cross-cutting nature of the subject area, mitigation of impacts on ecosystem

services will be captured in the Environmental and Social Management Plans. In some

cases, mitigation measures are common across several impact topics.

5.2 Drinking water supply

Mitigation against impacts to community water supplies will be covered in the Mine Water

Management Plan and updates, following monitoring and regular review. This provides

for the following:

Ensuring that existing water requirements of high value ecological and / or community

receptors are met before operational requirements;

Mitigating impacts on existing water users, including communities and ecosystems;

Complying with standards for all discharges to the environment; and

Minimising large fluctuations in dewatering rates.


5.3 Erosion control, Nutrient cycling and soil formation processes

Mitigation measures for erosion control will include those set out in the Hydrology and

Soils Sections but in general include:

Avoiding unnecessary disturbance of stable surfaces;

Protection of soils outside work areas from damage by prohibiting

the movement of construction vehicles and equipment outside designated areas;





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 5-30

Locating temporary construction areas to avoid ground at risk from erosion wherever

possible;

Scheduling works with high erosion potential during the dry season wherever

possible; and

Rehabilitating all disturbed land as soon as practical after completion of works.

Minimising works in areas where there is the potential for slope instability;


5.4 Water cycling

Mitigation against impacts on water cycling will be covered in the Mine Water

Management Plan and updates, following monitoring and regular review. This provides

for the following:

Ensuring that existing water requirements of high value ecological and / or community

receptors are met before operational requirements;

Complying with standards for all discharges to the environment; and

Minimising large fluctuations in dewatering rates.


Table 5-1 lists the revised final rating after mitigation and residual impacts.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 5-31

Table 5-1: Ecosystem Prioritisation and final rating values after mitigation and residual

impacts.

Ecosystem Service Importance to affected community1

Replaceability2 Value Rating3

Final Rating after mitigation and residual impacts


Food: Collecting mushrooms/fungi

Low Moderate Low Not Significant

Food: collection of herbs

Low Moderate Low Not Significant

Food: Fishing Low High Low Not Significant

Food: Hunting Low Moderate Low Not Significant

Crop cultivation High High Medium Not Significant

Livestock rearing High High Medium Not Significant

Drinking water Essential Moderate Critical Not Significant

Cultural Services

Cultural heritage sites of importance

High Low Medium Minor

Traditional practices and activities

Low High Medium Not Significant

Regulating Services

Erosion control High Moderate High Not Significant

Supporting Services

Nutrient cycling processes

High Moderate High Not Significant

Soil formation processes

High Moderate High Not Significant





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 6-32

6.0 CONCLUSION

The Ecosystem Service Impact Assessment has identified that a number of provisional

services are used by the local human population but that these remain low with only a

few individuals concerned using a number of natural resources in the immediate Project

impact area. The Project is located adjacent to other alternative areas of similar natural

habitat which therefore provides alternative solution within a comparatively small

distance. It is not envisaged that any displacement will occur of people seeking natural

resources in areas where existing other villages or towns are also collecting, thereby

potentially increasing competition and possibly tension.

Cultural, Archaeological, Aesthetic and recreational values are all addressed in depth in

the SIA and the reader should refer to this report for a final statement. In addition, in

reference to mine Provisioning (Freshwater, Soil) and Regulating (Erosion) services

other Project documentation details full mitigation approaches and residual impacts (e.g.

Mine Water Management Plan, Closure Plan etc). Further information is also available

in the Traffic Management Plan in reference to people and animal (cattle, sheep, goats

etc.) crossings.





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Page 7-33

7.0 REFERENCES

AMEC A150-14-R2244 (2014) Framework Traffic Management Plan.

AMEC A150-14-R2271 (2014) Social Impact Assessment.

Conradin, K. (2012) Sustainable sanitation and water management – the water cycle,

SSWM, Accessed from: http://www.sswm.info/category/concept/water-cycle on

02.08.14.

Global Reporting Initiative (2011) Approach for reporting on ecosystem services –

incorporating ecosystem services into an organisations performance disclosure,

Amsterdam.

EBRD (2012) Performance Standard 6 - Biodiversity, Conservation and Sustainable

Management of Living Natural Resources, European Bank of Reconstruction and

Development, London.

IFC (2012) Performance Standard 6 - Guidance Notes, International Finance

Corporation, Washington DC.

Landsburg, F., Ozment, S., Stickler, M., Henninger, N., Treweek, J., Venn, O., Mock, G.

(2011) Working Paper: Ecosystem Services Review for Impact Assessment Introduction

and Guide to Scoping, World Resources Institute, Washing DC. Accessed from:

http://wri.org/publication/ecosystem-services-review-for-impact-assessment.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystem and Human Well-being,

Biodiversity synthesis, World Resources Institute, Washington DC.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Opportunities and Challenges for Business

and Industry, World Resources Institute, Washington DC.

Petkov, G.(Ed.) (2010) Balkan Mineral and Mining EAD – Environmental Impact

Assessment for Investment Project for Mining and Processing of Auriferous Ores from

the Ada Tepe Prospect of Khan Krum Gold Deposit, Krumovgrad.

Rio Tinto (2012) Simandou SEIA - Ecosystem Services, Chapter 23.

Wong, M.H. (2003) Ecological restoration of mine degraded soils, with emphasis on

metal contaminated soils, Chemosphere 50, 775-780.

World Resources Institute (2011) Ecosystem Services Review for Impact Assessment –

Introduction and Guide to Scoping, Washington DC.

http://www.sswm.info/category/concept/water-cycle

http://wri.org/publication/ecosystem-services-review-for-impact-assessment





NOVEMBER 2014

Project No.: 7879140150 Appendices

APPENDICES





NOVEMBER 2014


APPENDIX A

Screened-out Ecosystem Services





NOVEMBER 2014


Preliminary Assessment – screened out ES

Minor Ecosystem Service impacts include two provisional services and one regulating.

Table A-1: Screened out minor Ecosystem Services.

Service provided Ecosystem Service type

Description

Timber Provisioning Practiced by artisanal loggers and by local communities requiring timber for construction of buildings.

Honey harvesting Provisioning

Practiced by individuals in local villages requiring rural areas consisting of woodland and semi-natural habitats but not economically important to anyone. Bee hives can be relocated with little trouble and would often be moved to new areas.

Forest habitats acting as disease and pest regulators

Regulating Areas of high value forest habitat types assist in reducing disease and pests e.g. bats feeding on mosquitoes.

Those identified as Not Significant in terms of ecosystem impacts include one regulating

service.

Table A-2: Screened out non-significant Ecosystem Services.

Service provided Ecosystem Service type

Description

Tortoise harvesting Provisioning

Tortoise have been targeted for collection by some local people. It’s a prohibited activity by Bulgarian Low. Specific actions to protect these threatened species have already occurred with off-setting of an area with semi-protection and monitoring. A Tortoise Action Plan has also been prepared which will include developing educational plans and working with volunteers in order to steer existing users away from this activity.

Forest habitats as regulators of air quality

Regulating See main SIA and report on Forests and Greenhouse gases (e.g. CO2).

Ecosystem Services Baseline and Impact Assessment Dundee ... · ECOSYSTEM SERVICES BASELINE AND...

Documents

Transcript of Ecosystem Services Baseline and Impact Assessment Dundee ... · ECOSYSTEM SERVICES BASELINE AND...